Author
Jeffrey Pfeffer believes power is addictive – in a psychological and physical
sense. Historian John Acton coined the phrase “power tends to corrupt and
absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Scientists claim this is true.
Absolute and unchecked power, is intoxicating. That’s from Nayef
Al-Rodhan. Its effects occur at the cellular and neurochemical level. They are
manifested behaviourally in a variety of ways, ranging from heightened
cognitive functions to lack of inhibition, poor judgement, extreme narcissism,
perverted behaviour, and gruesome cruelty.
The primary neurochemical involved in the reward of power that is known
today is dopamine. The same chemical transmitter responsible for producing a
sense of pleasure. Power activates the very same reward circuitry in the brain
and creates an addictive “high” in much the same way as drug addiction. Like
addicts, most people in positions of power will seek to maintain the high they
get from power. And this too at all cost.
Dopamine is responsible for producing a sense of pleasure and helps us
to retain information and engage in reward-driven learning. It is released in
certain parts of the brain by rewarding experiences, such as achievement, food
consumption, and other pleasures of life. However it is also produced in
behaviours that may be unhealthy and life-threatening. Either way, dopamine
release is what makes people want to re-engage in these activities.
In more accountable societies, checks and balances exist to avoid the
inevitable consequences of power. Yet, in cases where leaders possess absolute
and unchecked power, changes in leadership and transitions to more
consensus-based rule are unlikely to be smooth. Gradual withdrawal of absolute
power is the only way to ensure that someone will be able to accept
relinquishing it.
Human beings are characterised by “emotional amoral egoism”. Humans are emotionally driven and, our moral
compass is malleable and heavily influenced by circumstances, survival value,
and our perceived “emotional self-interest”. Emotions, however, are not
immaterial: they are neurochemically-mediated and physical in so far as they
have neurochemical correspondents.
Dopamine activates a reward system that has been essential to our
survival as a species, encouraging us to return to behaviour that is essential
for life. This process is what Nayef says as the “neurochemical
gratification principle” (NGP), where even the expectation of a
reward is believed to function in a similar way to reward itself.
Dictators are, therefore, more likely to appear in situations where
checks and balances are not present or consolidated. Brutality and a lack of
regard for citizens of countries governed by leaders with absolute power will
tend to be the rule, regardless of the psychological state of the ruler. Hitler, Stalin and Napoleon, for example, all appeared incapable
of empathy and of comprehending the value of human life. They condemned
thousands to death in suicidal military campaigns.
Absolute power can also lead people to believe that a spiritual force is guiding them even within
established democracies. For example, former US president George Bush told
people that God wanted him to wage war against Iraq. His ally in the Iraq War,
and former British prime minister Tony Blair, is also thought to have believed
that God wanted him to take the country into war to combat evil.
The certainty that such leaders seem to possess is a symptom of
extremely high levels of dopamine. Not only are powerful individuals likely to
be egocentric, but also paranoid. The latter may be a consequence of
self-deception in the face of conflicting advice from close associates.
The neurochemistry of power has implications for politics and for
political change. Since power activates our neuronal reward systems in the
brain, people in positions of unchecked power are likely to lack the
self-awareness required to act with restraint or to seek a consensual form of
decision making.
Since sudden withdrawal of power like the abrupt withdrawal from drugs
produces uncontrollable cravings, those who possess power, are highly unlikely
to give it up willingly, smoothly and without human and material loss. We
see that in Trump, Putin, Kim Jong-un and other dictators (although Trump may
dispute this postulate and describe himself as a stable genius).
What about Malaysia?
We saw
that playing-out in the past week. There were no shortage of potential PMs. It
is something most politicians aspire to – even though they state officially
they are doing it “for the nation” or “to unite the people”. So some people do
imagine that we the people lack basic intelligence. If they were truly for the
people, then we would have MPs focused on those living in PPR flats, the
homeless, the refugees, the poor fishermen and farmers, the orphans, the
marginalised and the down-trodden. They would do social action program, find
monetary support/resources for the disadvantaged, bursaries or scholarships for
deserving students and employment opportunities for graduates. Instead, it was
all about race, religion and royalty. What a load of crap!
References:
1. The neurochemistry of power has implications
for political change,
Nayef Al-Rodhan, The Conversation.
2. Power is an additive drug, Jeffrey
Pfeffer, www.fastcompany.com
3. Power really does corrupt as scientists
claim it’s as addictive as cocaine, www.dailymail.co.uk
(28 April 2012)
No comments:
Post a Comment